Document MJyzzjw45pQvGyq09RJweKM1a

W. R. Richard - Research Center February 4, 1971 v... R. E. Keller BIODEQRADATION RATES AND H. Munch NATURE'S EVIDENCE OF BIODEGRADATION - CHLORINATED BIPHENYLS E. S. Tucker - S. 2nd St. - S.2ndSt. --STZhdGt I would like to set a target date of Monday, February 8, to have a written document which could help answer O.E.'a questions on MCS 1016, its degradation rate; and why MCS 1016 la a better fluid In the environment than Aroclor 1242 and Aroclor 1254. We agreed to use Ruabon's degradation rates, supplemented by our own evidence. Ve need to place these rates rela tive to alkylbenzene sulfonate rates. We were to examine the rat tissue, fish samples, milk samples, chicken samples, etc., for evidence of bio degradable vs. non-blodegradable chlorinated biphenyl isomers. For our Internal use this document should also review the Ruabon reports on which Isomers will and won't degrade. We need to evaluate which Isomers In MCS 1016, MCS 1043 may cause problems and evaluate the chances that culture Ca or solubilization of particular isomers will result In a biodegradation of refraction Isomers such aa 4,4'. At the earliest time possible, preferably before Thursday, February 11, I will need for internal use a report on the biodegradation of chlorinated phenyl ethers of: trichlorodlphehyl ether 2,2*-dlchlorodlphenyl ether j ehlorophenyl butyl ether or whatever ones we have done as compared with MCS 1016 and MCS 1043. I have a review session on the biodegradation program with Howard Bergen on Friday, February 12, and this Is the critical lsaue. Thanks. V. R. Richard /is PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT 3^* UAH osn* HARTOLDMON0043292